From the beginning of this book, I have presented a twofold methodology. On the one hand, I argued for the possibility of opening up Ghazālī’s text to the resources available beyond the frontiers of Islam, mainly the theory of John Finnis. On the other hand, though John Finnis speaks towards the end of his Natural Law and Natural Rights about the possibilities of relating his theory to God, Ghazālī does not end, but begins with God. Therefore, I stressed that availing Ghazālī’s text of academic sources beyond Islamic studies should not cancel the need to search for a theological unity in Ghazālī’s own language, ultimately based on the Koran as the defining revelation of all things Islamic. For, if our reading of Ghazālī’s text really reflects what it is claiming to read (i.e Ghazālī’s text) then we cannot conceal Ghazālī’s theological concern. In this chapter I relate to a range of modern readings of Ghazālī and the place of law in the medieval Muslim context, arguing that some examined different disciplines, social, political, or religious, separately. This caused some rightly to perceive a narrow stress on ‘rationality’ and ‘deconstruction’. 1 Instead of such an approach I stress the Koran’s centrality and effect on the making of Islam’s politics as the basis both of our difference in methodology from some available scholarships and of doing justice to the theological significance of Ghazālī’s text, and therefore, to all aspects of Ghazālī’s text.